shoe11

I had my 15's stacked for a while, but after moving them around in my room I decided I liked them better seperated. Basically you need to play around with them in your room and find the response that pleases you best. ~shoe

Max, I originally purchased 750GB worth of storage with the plan of storing my entire CD collection in AIFF format. AIFF is the native format for CD audio and as a result when I ripped my collection at that size I needed around ~475GB if memory serves. I completed the ripping into AIFF shortly before Apple released their Apple Lossless Encoder for iTunes. Apple Lossless is bit perfect to the original uncompressed files stored on CD's, but still has a compression scheme to reduce the file size vis a vis uncompressed (AIFF) files. So once this format came out, I went through and converted my entire AIFF collection into ALC files. It saved quite a bit of storage space for me and again the files are exact copies of uncompressed CD's. Whereas the AIFF file format will always be 1411 kbps for each track, the ALC encoder is between 800 to 1100 kbps per track. That's why I'm using so much more storage space than you are. ~shoe

Here's my stats: Total length: 35.5 days Bitrate: Apple Lossless Song Number: 12973 Total Size: 311.5 GB Output: M-Audio Audiophile USB -> Illuminations D-60 -> Benchmark DAC-1 -> Etymotic ER 4S Anybody using more than 311 GB? ~shoe

Well stay down in VA Beach then cuz in Northern VA, new townhomes will run you $300k and you don't even want to know how much even basic single family homes will cost. ~shoe

I purchased the Benchmark DAC1 a few weeks ago. As an avid headphone listener, I was in need of a headphone amplifier and I was as well looking to take my source to a higher level than my present Rotel 1070. I didn't need an elaborate headphone amp and wanted to stay under 1k. The DAC1 is a perfect fit for this application. The headphone amp is a solid, if not exotic unit and the DAC is considered high end. Additionally, I frequent HeadFi.org quite a bit and the DAC1 was getting very solid reviews for both it's headphone amplifier and DAC performance. Those recommendations, the fact that it met my needs and the rave reviews given the unit in the audio press convinced me to order one up and have a listen to it myself. I wanted a simple, high resolution setup for 2 main purposes. Presently I have the DAC1 connected via an Illuminations D-60 coax cable to my Rotel 1070 serving as the transport. Additionally, I can remove the connection to the Rotel and connect the D-60 to the Digital coax out of my M-Audio audiophile in my computer. This provides a quality output for me when listening to the 1200+ CD's I have ripped in Apple Lossless via iTunes on my computer. As for headphones, my primary phones are Etymotics ER4-S, but I also sometimes use the Senn HD-650's with Cardas cable. I don't spend a lot of time reviewing multiple products, or analzying the sound to the nth degree. I focus most of my time on acquiring music for my collection. Hardware purchases to me come down to what do I want to improve, is the product within my budget, is the product a quality piece and overall does it improve my enjoyment of music collection I'm building. Having said that, when running the Rotel 1070->D-60->DAC1->Ety ER4-S combo you get an incredibly high resolution setup. The sound is incredibly clear, very natural, with well controlled bass. I would consider the setup I'm using to be a very "scalpel" like setup in terms of presentation. There is absolutely no "veil" to the sound and the setup just picks up everything from any disc you play. This is exactly the type of sound that I was looking for and anticipated that I'd get with the DAC1. As an interesting counterpoint, switching to the HD-650's provides a much more laid back sound to the setup and many members may find this preferable. BTW I do have the DVD-2900 as well, but haven't tried it with the DAC1. As I have the Rotel 1070 and have always prefered the CD perfomance of the Rotel vs. the 2900, I never intended to use the DAC1 in such an application. I also haven't tried the DAC1 directly with my Rotel amp connected to the RF-7's, although I suspect that so long as you enjoy the present sound you have between your amp and speakers, the DAC1 should only enhance your enjoyment. As sound is always subjective to each listener, I hope this was of some value to others. The best recommendation for anyone curious about the unit is to order one from Audio Advisor, put it in your system and make your own decisions. Audio Advisor offers a generous 30 day return policy so you should have plenty of time to decide if it's your cup of tea. ~shoe

Definitely consider the Rotel RCD-1070 and the new revision RCD-1072. ~shoe

gotta love the products description: Turn table&Curtridge Speakers system Amplifers

While their descriptions are hilarious to read just suppose that we got a chance to listen to their gear and the system sounded incredible? All of us have our screwed up English (not perhaps as bad as these fellows), but I've always been impressed with the inventions of the Japanese so I'd rather not bad mouth them only to have to eat my words later. It would be interesting to read a mainstream review of this gear though. ~shoe And remember when buying cables: "Only this as for the connection cord without the vice, the like is not in others." LMAO

Yeah the descriptions alone on the Audio Tekne site are confusing as hell.... Imagine if you were thinking of spending $250k on speakers and either you went to the company's website or Stereophile magazine and got the following review to help you in your decision: "First, please try listening 16cm full-range speaker system SP-8716 of our company. You understand the sound that is near the original sound, and the large floor type speaker system was developed on the special order for those who wish a further near the original sound. Box vibration, horn vibration, and division vibration of vibration element were complete to eliminated. As a result, there be not the excessive sound other than a music signal and approached limitlessly the original sound. In a multi-way speaker system, you have to combine the image of sound position of each speaker unit. If to do not combine the image of sound position each speaker unit is heard in pieces. Furthermore, sound pressure of each unit is not able to combine the right level. If the image of sound position is combined, each unit becomes one sound source, and the presence of the speaker system will be lost and it will become a natural sound. The sound is natural and without the vice, and so becomes the personality sound of the equipment that are using the all stage. Depending on usage, the theory of an old audio may be reversed fundamentally. The evaluation in the time that did a first audition thinks that it is inevitable to feel with the sound that there is not force furthermore and unsatisfying sound. As for this system, all of a woofer-box and attached parts are made from the carbon plate and the carbon block. Furthermore, since special processing of the cone paper has been carried out, 38cm woofer sounds to the same sound as the full range speaker. It is a fact although it thinks that many persons cannot understand this phenomenon." ~shoe

How about this simple 2 channel vinyl setup: Audio Tekne Turntables, ACP-88.014 $96,570.00 Audio Tekne TFA-9501 Stereo Preamplifier $96,570.00 Audio Tekne 2-Channel Amp, TEA-9501PCS Phono Equalizer, Stereo $257,521.00 Audio Tekne Special Order Floor-Type Large Speaker $193,140.00 Total $643,801.00

I know their not cheap, but with 7's you really should be looking to at least the RSW-12 or if possibly the RSW-15. Given your money concerns and the solid bass that you get from the 7's by themselves, I'd save my cash until I could get a more substantial sub to pair with them. ~shoe

15x2????

Frzninvt, I actually am almost through the process of doing exactly what your considering. I have over 1000 CD's and I'm around 750 copied so far. Figuring 650MB per CD at least, I lucked out and purchased 3 250GB Maxtor External HD's at around $279 a piece if memory serves (I managed to catch a sale on them at 20% off). They are all hooked up to DLink USB 7 port hub which plugs directly into my laptop. I'm using Win XP Pro with iTunes. I formatted each drive into 4 partitions formatted as FAT32 with non-default block sizes given the large files. NTFS formatted drives fragmented like crazy in my experience. While buying 3/4 a terabyte of disk space seems crazy, given what some supposed MP3's based devices sell for these days, I thought it reasonable investment. I'm ripping each CD as an AIFF file. As far as storage space goes, even with 3 drives I was figuring I'd have a fair amount of free space for future expansion. My experience is that many CD's fall well short of the 650MB per disc I was using as a reference and so I'll have a good bit more expansion room than I first expected. The biggest impediment in the project is the sheer amount of time it takes to transfer each disc. Even with my high speed Plextor drive, it's taken a significant amount of time, but having my entire CD collection cataloged and able to be played back randomly without needed to swap discs is really worth the investment in money and time. My final piece to this project will be in next week. I'm building a new desktop computer to which the drive collection will be attached. Sound will be output from an M-Audio Audiophile USB connected to the PC which will be connected via .5m Kimber Kable Silver Streak interconnects to a custom made Ray Samuels XP-7 amp which will power my Etymotic ER4-S canalphones. If you plan to do it and have any questions, let me know I'd be happy to help. ~shoe

Paul, Typo on the age field, 32 actually. I live in Northern Virginia and from what I've been able to gather I don't think there are any SET memebers on here from the area, but I could be wrong. As for talking myself out of this amp or that amp, I haven't really done anything like that as I'm not in a hurry. I think I have a concern regarding whether or not any of the Wright amps could really work with my speakers, though there appears to be ample documentation and sentiment that they would. There are several members who think it would work fine and several who think it wouldn't work (or at least as well as it could). The topic is such that there is never going to be consensus one way or the other and as this is a subjective hobby to begin with neither point of view to me is wrong. My bottom line is that I'm looking to move up to a more high end pre/power be it tubed or even SS which for around $2500 which will pair very well with my 7's and their sound characteristics. With so much discussion back and forth regarding the optimal minimum amount of power, the only real way for me to find out if any of them work for me is to order some in and give them a listen. That was I guess more of the original premise of my post. If you were to pick one to try with the 7's which would you take and why. ~shoe

---------------- On 2/3/2004 10:48:33 AM mtber101 wrote: Do people choice the bookselfs because they give more of a directional sound where as the RS-7 are closer to 180degrees? What if I want the best of both worlds? Anyway to do that? ---------------- As for your first question, I'd say there are several factors which could include, usage, placement, price, etc. As I use my surround setup more for music, I went with what I would consider to be the more musical speaker, the RB-5's. Also influencing my decision was that I couldn't place the RS-7's in my room, but it was easy to set the 5's on stands anywhere in the room and they would work adequately for me given the amount of movie viewing I do. Lastly, I liked the convenience of being able to peel off the 5's from surround duty and use them as a second set of primary stereo speakers in another room when I want. The RS-7's will not perform well in that type of a scenario. By design that is just not there intended usage. Again each of us have different priorities based on our own habits so just flesh out what you really plan to use your setup for, keep reading and the answers as to what's right for you should come clear. As for best of both worlds, why not buy both? You'll find there are lots of people on here with more Klipsch than they really know what to do with.

For movies the RS-7's would provide better sound dispersion around your listening area than a RB-75 would given it's design differences. Now with the advent of DVD-A/SACD surround music, more people are using traditional bookshelf style speakers for the rear channels. In general for surround music the standard monitor design of the RB-75 is preferred. For surround music, if you plan on RF-7's for your fronts in the future, then the 75's would be the ticket for you. You should consider how you plan to use your system most frequently first and then let that dictate your purchasing decision. I doubt you'll find any real disagreement with either model though. ~shoe

DaddyDee, I check audiogon with regular frequency as I suspect most of us do, but I've had some issues with "Used" transactions in the past so I'm inclined to buy new. Additionally, I've read nothing other than great reviews of Mr. Wright's products and his support of them once purchased. One thing I'm not is in a hurry. As everyone knows just deciding/researching a new audio purchase is something to enjoy. Thanks for your comments. ~shoe

Thanks everyone for your comments. I assume if Klipsch made very inefficient speakers we wouldn't be having such lively conversations regarding how low we can go on our power requirements. Last night when I was shooting out db levels for my listening, I was giving my best guess. Couldn't really break out the SPL meter and crank them up to 95db with the significant other sleeping just above. However, this morning, with said other cleared out I've been doing some testing and I'm finding that I was actually overshooting my levels by quite a bit. At my normal listening levels with Hendrix playing "Red House", my SPL was reading around 65-70. At what I would say is my personal highest listening level with the same material, about 85db was plenty high enough for me. Based on this information and Dean's previous comment, I believe that perhaps I could still use any of the amps I've mentioned. Honestly I suspect I've never registered much north of 90db. Out of concern for my hearing and what sounds good to me, I can't imagine how loud it would be in my room at 95db and up. ~shoe

I've followed the majority of the discussions posted here regarding the ability/inability of low power (SET) amps to provide the needed power/dynamic headroom for speakers such as mine so I'm not surprised that the yeas and the nays have started to make their positions known in this one. I'm aware of the fact that the 7's are highly efficient, but also that perhaps the smallest output amps simply don't have enough headroom for my needs. That's why my opinion has shifted to the Mono10's from the 3.5. Even with the 10's I still think perhaps I'm below the output that would be best for my speakers. From my SPL meter I'm generally around 80-85db for day to day use though sometimes going up to the mid-90's once the work day is through. I suspect that at minimum I'd probably be better off with a 30w Class A amp from a well regarded company such as Wright. Exactly who makes those amps is something I'm not quite clear on. From my current Rotel gear looking higher up the performance rung in solid state I find a ton of $1.5 to 2k models to choose from such as Creek, MF, YBA, etc, but when I switch to tubes, beyond the SET amps from Wright, Welborne, and Cary, the few companies that come to mind are CJ, Manley, ASL and Jolida. In the 30-50 watt tube category what other companies should I be researching? I see that Wright has a WPA 50-50 50 watts RMS per channel push-pull power amplifier which would seem to be a good fit. Too bad it's almost $4k. I appreciate the comments. ~shoe

To celebrate a recent career advancement, I'm considering a purchase from Wright Sound consisting of the WLA12A pre and one of the following: WPA 3.5 Mono8 Mono10 I listen predominantly at low to moderate levels in a fairly large room and blues/guitar rock is the music of choice. I've never owned a SET amp nor tube amp of any kind for that matter, but plan to take the plunge based on other's comments regarding tubes and the quality/sonic reputation of the Wrights. The 3.5 was my first choice given that I believe it would provide sufficient power for my listening habits and the 2A3 tube appears to me to be the most popular choice amongst the Klipsch SET members on the forum. Having said that looking a little further at the options Mr. Wright has available now the Mono10 has me thinking it might be a better fit. My reasoning behind that would be due to my concerns regarding power requirements for the RF-7's. As provided on Wright's homepage: "The amp runs Class A pp to about 6 watts, Class AB1 through 10 watts, and Class AB2 up to approximately 20 watts peak. The driver (6BL7) is operated as low impedance, high output to handle low mu output triodes (2A3), with a 6SL7 used as a voltage amp/phase inverter." The 10 to me provides a bit more of a safety net in terms of power, but I have no real comments/feedback to go on regarding how this type of amp might sound with 7's. Does anyone on the forum have experience with this amp? If you had 7's based on my listening habits, which do you think would be the best fit? ~shoe

I have 2 RSW-15's presently. As formica has already advised, you gain 3-6db of output over a single setup. I love the RSW's for music and when I was offered a great deal on the 2nd 15, I couldn't say no. For music the RSW's add such a great, solid bass line. It's punchy and very responsive. I've toyed with the idea of selling one off thinking it was overkill, but I just can't bring myself to do it. They just provide such a solid low octave foundation for music. As for placement, I used to have one in each front corner on the outside of my RF-7's. Now I know that scientifically, I'm not supposed to be able to localize low frequencies, but after listening and experimenting with placements, I found that I preferred to have one between the 7's and the other set over in what I would say is my more open front corner. Each person has their own personal preference on what sounds best to them, so if you get a 2nd one move them around a bit until you find what best works for you. Of course if your lugging RSW-15's around at 85lbs a piece, you might get tired of this in a hurry. ~shoe

I can't speak to the older Rotel 9-series model though I've heard very good things about them. You may wish to take a look at the Rotel RCD-1070 or the just released/updated 1072. I have the 1070 and I'm quite pleased with it's sound. Either player new should be attainable for a good bit under the $750 limit you've set. I picked mine up for $599 from an authorized dealer if memory serves. There are additionally several good reviews for each model available online. HTH ~shoe

Always off as I have no kids, dogs, etc which require protection. ~shoe

---------------- On 10/28/2003 4:20:26 PM m00n wrote: I wonder if the average person can really tell the difference between a real diamond and a cubit zerconium (sp?). As a joke, get a chunk of coal, put it in a ring and give it to her. When she ask's what the hell is this, tell her it's her diamond, it just aint done yet. ---------------- m00n, You trying to get me killed? Thanks to everyone for their comments. I'm lucky in that in my shopping I have a family friend who is a certified gemologist and who's been in the business for better than 30 years. He maintains a small "retail" office and sells at just over cost. The hard part has been prying my significant other away from the basic retail establishment which while having the rings more more accessible are also way more inflated price wise. I've taken her to the retail stores simply to get her likes/dislikes ironed out and now I can work with my family friend to design the ring (he does custom settings as well) and select the stones for it. I'm definitely planning to buy the highest quality diamond my budget will allow as opposed to going for a larger carat weight. I'm helped in this respect as she has a very tiny hand which would be swallowed up by a diamond any bigger than 1.5 carats max. ~shoe

Shoe is engagement ring shopping. I'm finding the process to be alot like buying audio equipment. There are tons of configurations, various opinions on which characteristic of the stone is most important and being able to spend a whole lot for a very small object. Reminds me of shopping for interconnects. I'm in pretty good shape already. I know the cut (Emerald), the setting (platinum), the stone layout (diamond flanked by sapphires), her ring size and roughly the carat weight I'm looking at (1-1.5). What I'm curious about is experience of others who have been down this path that I now travel regarding the process in general and what combination of C's they ultimately ended up going with. Any thoughts on this topic as always are appreciated. If we approached our ring buying like our Klipsch buying then I suspect there will be some interesting stories/opinions. ~shoe